I would say that post WW2 and especially poat cold war that western civilisation has been in a sort of decline. Falling birth rates, relatively stagnant economy particularly in Europe, the decline of interest in Christianity without really replacing it with another motivating force. Instead we have vague notions of humanism, set against a relativist morality which says all things are only right and wrong depending om context.

One of my favourite questions for alleged moderate Muslims is whether they will condemn stoning as being always and everywhere wrong. So very few will. On the other hand many non Muslim liberals will insist that stoning is wrong in our eyes only because of the culture and values we have here and now, and that westerners condemning KSA and other countries which practice stoning are being arrogant and imperialist. Something we have lost the confidence for.

To my mind stoning is both a symptom and a cause of a sick society which can never be free, creative, enjoyable or decent. Not stoning people to death is better than stoning people to death. You can treat this as a universal objective value whether you agree with that in the metaphysical sense or not.

Without the confidence to say that some values are superior to others all we really have is separate ideas which change over time.

Islamists of course are not relativists. They believe their values are superior to ours, always have been and always will be.

I doubt a Christian revival is likely and not really desirable either but something to give the west confidence in itself seems needed.

One of the greats elements responsible for the prevailing gaps between Western (Judea-Christianity) and that of Islam is institution of self criticism, and constant re-examination of one's ideas and belief.

The very reasons for which, Opposition (political) parties exist. Same true for Freedom of Expression. All designed with sole intent to improve quality of life, and adapt to new social-economic developments - Science & technology being one of the more pervasive drives of new standards.

Muhammad's master design was to preserve his legacy and control over his subjects in perpetuity . To do that, he used one of the well known tools used in negotiations - "the higher authority" syndrome. He used unapproachable Allah - knowing no one except him can contact him, he used to instill the type of influence as we see today.

Furthermore, he used combination of physical and psychological tools to make sure his system remain intact long after his death.

There is no question that, once Islam follows the J-C footstep with freedom of expression - including freedom to question many despicable practices and their applicability in modern time, in one or two generations, Islam will look far different then what we see today. A docile and timid religion, which stands on one legged table

Interestingly that description of attitudes to criticism and freedom of expression could apply across most of Asia (where I lived for a few years). Scrutiny, criticism and mockery tend to be taken very badly and the emphasis is always on group think, consensus and avoiding direct confrontation. When there is direct confrontation it's almost always solved by either pulling rank, or if no obvious hierarchy is available then by force and violence. People will all agree that black is white if it helps avoid a disagreement. Fortunately their cultural and religious background tends to give them a clear structure of hierarchy and to withdraw or concede small points.

I think in some senses the western Judeo-Christian post enlightenment acceptance of these things as part of a healthy society is the exception, not the Muslim aversion to criticism. However whereas Buddhism tends to act as a break on these things, Islam seems to act like a gallon of petrol flung over any small fire.

Hombre wrote:One of the greats elements responsible for the prevailing gaps between Western (Judea-Christianity) and that of Islam is institution of self criticism, and constant re-examination of one's ideas and belief.

The very reasons for which, Opposition (political) parties exist. Same true for Freedom of Expression. All designed with sole intent to improve quality of life, and adapt to new social-economic developments - Science & technology being one of the more pervasive drives of new standards.

Muhammad's master design was to preserve his legacy and control over his subjects in perpetuity . To do that, he used one of the well known tools used in negotiations - "the higher authority" syndrome. He used unapproachable Allah - knowing no one except him can contact him, he used to instill the type of influence as we see today.

Furthermore, he used combination of physical and psychological tools to make sure his system remain intact long after his death.

There is no question that, once Islam follows the J-C footstep with freedom of expression - including freedom to question many despicable practices and their applicability in modern time, in one or two generations, Islam will look far different then what we see today. A docile and timid religion, which stands on one legged table